A biologist was shocked to find his name was mentioned several times in a scientific paper, which references papers that simply don’t exist.

  • phx
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Citing sources by name rather than providing full links/ISBN’s/etc?

    • JoBo@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ah! “Bibliography” is an ambiguous term.

      As the linked article says, one measure that journals are starting to adopt is requiring DOI or PMID links for each reference. It ought to be standard anyway, it’s much less work for reviewers to check the references if they’re easy to find. Even if they exist, they often don’t say what the authors cite them as saying. But journals don’t pay anyone for checking these things so it often doesn’t get done. Peer review needs to be paid for. For-profit journals need to die.

      • phx
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah that’s fair. Since Covid I’ve noticed that a bunch of the more vocal opponents online liked to pick actual scientific articles and quote small sections way out of context in order to support their “view”. It’s like using scientific articles for anti-science. That pull that shit repeatedly and piss people off, then report anyone who gets a bit to loud in their response. Seems a whole playbook these days